Mayflower District Court
#sadoimpacto-v-clark-county-sheriffs-office-et-al
This is the start of #sadoimpacto-v-clark-county-sheriffs-office-et-al channel.
clerkFlow Bot2025-06-01 10:19 p.m.
clerkFlow pinned a message to this channel.2025-08-28 06:54 p.m.
Brenda Cornwallis 2025-06-01 10:20 p.m.
Assigned to @Awesome
Brenda Cornwallis used /add
clerkFlow Bot2025-06-01 10:20 p.m. @Brenda Cornwallis has added @meowiitten to the case channel.
Case Modified
Awesome 2025-06-01 10:21 p.m.@meowiitten You’re requesting a TRO, correct? Can I get a summary of why this temporary, interim relief is warranted?
Awesome
meowiitten 2025-06-01 10:33 p.m.
First , Plaintiff is likely to succeed on the merits because the Live Fire Exercises Act (“LFEA”), as applied, violates due process rights under Mayflower Const. art. I, § 5. The statute permits live ammunition exercises in public spaces—i.e., the City of Lancer. The statute permits lethal and unlawful conduct: "it shall be lawful to shoot, injure, and kill those directly involved in the exercise, provided there is mutual consent on both sides, proper permissions have been obtained, and the exercise is held in compliance with this act" (3 M.S.C. 2 § 1503); "it shall be lawful to damage and destroy property belonging to the agency(s) involved in the exercise or belonging to the State, provided there is mutual consent on both sides, proper permission has been obtained, and the exercise is held in compliance with this act" (3 M.S.C. 2 § 1504).
Second , Plaintiff faces irreparable harm because Defendants may repeat the exercise at any time. There is a live fire exercise nearly every other day; death is irreparable harm. Stenberg v. Carhart , 530 U.S. 914 (2000).
Third , the balance of equities heavily favors Plaintiff. Plaintiff asks only for a temporary halt to publicly conducted live fire events .
Andfourth , the public interest demands restraint where state actors are authorized to “shoot, injure, and kill” during training exercises held in highly-populated civilian areas.
A movant is generally entitled to a temporary restraining order when he demonstrates the following 4 prongs: (1) “that he is likely to succeed on the merits;” (2) “that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm [without the TRO];” (3) “that the balance of equities tips in his favor;” and (4)“that an injunction is in the public interest.”See Jerry's Flower Barn v. State of Mayflower , No. 24-03 (Mayfl. Sup. Ct. Oct. 18, 2024) (Totoro, J., concurring) (citingWinter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. , 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008)).
And
meowiittenA movant is generally entitled to a temporary restraining order when he demonstrates the following 4 prongs: (1) “that he is likely to succeed on the merits;” (2) “that he is lik...
meowiitten 2025-06-01 10:34 p.m.
Exh 1:
meowiitten 2025-06-01 10:34 p.m.
The one today took place in the City of Lander, not at the MNG base. So the two should not be confused.
meowiittenExh 1:
Awesome 2025-06-01 10:35 p.m.
Hm, and they didn’t provide the location of where this live-fire was taking place, correct?
AwesomeHm, and they didn’t provide the location of where this live-fire was taking place, correct?
meowiitten 2025-06-01 10:37 p.m.
The statute allows for localized, county-wide, and state-wide live fire exercises. The one today was county-wide, so presumably it could've taken place anywhere (Mersea, Medford, etc.). However, the hub was Lander City. But, to answer your question: no. There was no particularized notice as to where the majority of the activities would be taking place. And that message was the only notice. There was no actual notice in-game, which is discretionary under 3 M.S.C. 2 § 1501. No one knew this was going on unless they checked government announcements.(edited)
meowiittenThe statute allows for localized, county-wide, and state-wide live fire exercises. The one today was county-wide, so presumably it could've taken place anywhere (Mersea, Medford, e...(edited)
Awesome 2025-06-01 10:42 p.m.
Hm, that is indeed troubling. I’m inclined to grant a narrower TRO, but I’m hesitant to enjoin enforcement of the Act altogether (as applied to localities).(edited)
AwesomeHm, that is indeed troubling. I’m inclined to grant a narrower TRO, but I’m hesitant to enjoin enforcement of the Act altogether (as applied to localities).(edited)
meowiitten 2025-06-01 10:43 p.m.
Like I said, I only seek enjoinment of the public enforcement of the act. I take no issue with them practicing savagery on their own military property. It's when they come into our cities and do it that there is a problem
meowiitten 2025-06-01 10:43 p.m.
But I will let you rule as you wish, Your Honor!
meowiittenLike I said, I only seek enjoinment of the public enforcement of the act. I take no issue with them practicing savagery on their own military property. It's when they come into our...
meowiitten 2025-06-01 10:45 p.m.
And this enjoinment would only be temporary until we can get a proper briefing schedule for a PI(edited)
meowiitten 2025-06-01 10:45 p.m.
I don't think there would be any major disservice done to the gov. in that time
meowiitten 2025-06-01 10:46 p.m.
This would also not preclude legitimate law enforcement or military activity
meowiitten 2025-06-01 10:46 p.m.
Only live fire exercises
meowiitten 2025-06-01 10:46 p.m.
Meaning, using live ammunition that can kill or maim someone
meowiitten 2025-06-01 10:46 p.m.
Hence “shoot, injure, and kill”
meowiitten 2025-06-02 12:12 a.m.@Awesome 
meowiitten 2025-06-02 12:12 a.m.
A second county-wide live fire exercise was conducted the same day (yesterday). This one just came to my attention
meowiitten 2025-06-02 12:12 a.m.
This one was only posted in the MNG server. No one would ever have any way of knowing this was the case, once again
meowiitten 2025-06-02 12:13 a.m.
And even then, why should the MNG and the government in general expect people to be cognizant of these constant live fire "murder simulation" drills?
meowiitten 2025-06-02 12:13 a.m.
Near constantly
meowiittenNear constantly
Awesome 2025-06-02 12:22 a.m.
I’m writing an Order.
Awesome 2025-06-02 12:43 a.m.MINUTE ORDER: The Court has reviewed Plaintiff’s Complaint and Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order. First, preliminary injunctive relief, as here, is never granted as of right, for “[it] is an extraordinary and drastic remedy.” Mazurek v. Armstrong , 520 U.S. 968, 972 (1997) (per curiam) (citation omitted). Second, the Court applies the same standard to a temporary restraining order as that for a preliminary injunction. rochonto3 v. Singhski , No. CV-0102-25, Op. and Order Denying Mot. to Vacate, at 2, (Mayfl. Dist. Ct. Feb. 12 2025) (citing Stuhlbarg Int’l Sales Co. v. John D. Brush & Co. , 240 F.3d 832, 839 n. 7 (9th Cir. 2001); Ingram v. Galt , 50 F.3d 898, 900 (11th Cir. 1995)). The factors the Court considers in any such request are, thus: (1) the likelihood of success on the merits, (2) the threat of irreparable harm to the movant in the absence of relief, (3) the balance between this harm and any injury the non-moving party would suffer if relief were granted (the so-called “balance of equities”), and (4) where the public interest lies. Winter v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc. , 555 U.S. 7, 23 (2008). And where, as here, the government is the opposing party, the last two factors merge. Nken v. Holder , 556 U.S. 418, 435 (2009).
Awesome 2025-06-02 12:45 a.m.
The Court is satisfied that, at least at this early stage, the Plaintiff (Movant) has shown a fair probability of success on the merits and that he will suffer irreparable harm in the absence of immediate relief. The Court is also satisfied that the public interest does not lie in the Mayflower National Guard — or, indeed, the State — carrying out “exercises” involving firearms, live ammunition, and ordnances in a densely populated civilian area not closed or cordoned off by appropriate markings or signage. Similarly, the State will suffer minimal — or, most probably, no — harm from being required to take limited steps to prevent irreparable harm to bystanders or other non-participants. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order is GRANTED , and Defendants, and all of their successors, assigns, officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, and those persons acting in concert or participation with them, are forthwith and hereby ENJOINED AND RESTRAINED from directing, supervising, conducting, or participating in any training exercise involving the use of firearms, live ammunition, or other ordnances, if situated in or around the Township of Mersea, the City of Lander, or any other densely populated urban (civilian) area, unless (1) notice was provided to the public, detailing, describing, and otherwise setting forth the place or place(s) where the exercise would occur, at least one (1) hour prior to the commencement of the exercise; and (2) the place or place(s) where the exercise would occur are demarcated by barriers or other ploppables for the duration of the exercise, which were put up at least thirty (30) minutes prior to the commencement of the exercise. This Order is in effect for fourteen (14) days, or until further Order of the Court, whichever is earlier. Signed by Judge AwesomePIays. (Entered: 06/02/2025)
cc:@meowiitten @Solicitor General's Office
AwesomeThe Court is satisfied that, at least at this early stage, the Plaintiff (Movant) has shown a fair probability of success on the merits and that he will suffer irreparable harm in ...(edited)
Awesome 2025-06-02 12:46 a.m.
The @Prothonotary's Office is further DIRECTED to provide notice of the Court’s Order to the Mayflower National Guard and the Clark County Sheriff’s Office, and to furnish receipt thereof.(edited)
AwesomeThe Court is satisfied that, at least at this early stage, the Plaintiff (Movant) has shown a fair probability of success on the merits and that he will suffer irreparable harm in ...(edited)
meowiitten 2025-06-02 12:50 a.m.
With due respect, this order is just status quo ante with minimal procedural add-ons. One hour notice is already required by law (I do not contest the fact that they do follow this rule)... and live fire exercises are still allowed within populated civilian areas
meowiitten 2025-06-02 12:51 a.m.
The procedural add-on being the requirement of markings and/or barriers
meowiittenAwesome 2025-06-02 12:51 a.m.
This is not reasonable “public notice.”
meowiitten 2025-06-02 12:51 a.m.
What this challenge is trying to do is bar them from doing any live fire exercises in public
meowiitten 2025-06-02 12:52 a.m.
But not from doing it on their own property (i.e., Fort Standish)
meowiittenBut not from doing it on their own property (i.e., Fort Standish)
Awesome 2025-06-02 12:54 a.m.
Well, this TRO, as I mentioned before, is limited in scope.(edited)
meowiitten 2025-06-02 12:54 a.m.
If you will:
And:
The county-wide live fire exercise, conducted pursuant to LFEA, exposed
Plaintiff to the plausible threat of bodily harm or death. Plaintiff and others faced, and will
continue to face, “a real and immediate threat of future injury by the defendant[s]” in Defendants
collective enforcement of LFEA.City of Los Angeles v. Lyons , 461 U.S. 95, 113 n.8 (1983).
And:
The exercise was conducted in such a manner that, ipso facto, no “reasonable
measures” under 3 M.S.C. § 1501 could have effectively protected civilians present within the
affected zones.
meowiittenIf you will: The county-wide live fire exercise, conducted pursuant to LFEA, exposed Plaintiff to the plausible threat of bodily harm or death. Plaintiff and others faced, and...
Awesome 2025-06-02 12:55 a.m.
That’s a threadbare assertion that needs further briefing, though.
meowiitten 2025-06-02 12:56 a.m.
I thought it would be quite obvious by the statutes, no? They quite literally authorize the use of live ammunition and destructive devices to "shoot, injure, [destroy,] and kill"
meowiitten 2025-06-02 12:56 a.m.
This is what the statute itself defines as a live fire exercise: "any training exercise that involves the usage of firearms, live ammunition, and damage to property or harm to another person(s) is expected to occur."
meowiitten 2025-06-02 12:56 a.m.
The Act*
Awesome 2025-06-02 12:57 a.m.
No, I mean this.
Awesome 2025-06-02 12:57 a.m.
Your assertion that no measure could afford adequate protection needs to be briefed.
meowiitten 2025-06-02 12:57 a.m.
I suppose
Awesome 2025-06-02 12:57 a.m.
I can’t conclude much from your Complaint (in that respect), as you don’t elaborate.(edited)
meowiitten 2025-06-02 12:58 a.m.
But I am still unsatisfied with the TRO. The Act itself admits harm is expected to occur.
meowiitten 2025-06-02 12:58 a.m.
And they do all of this in the middle of a city
Awesome 2025-06-02 12:59 a.m.
Again, until we brief the issue that no measure will or would ever be sufficient, I’m extremely hesitant to enjoin the State from conducting live fires in public areas altogether.
Awesome 2025-06-02 12:59 a.m.
Once that’s briefed, I’ll have a more developed record to go off.
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:00 a.m.
How about a prime facie showing?
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:00 a.m.
prima facie
Awesome 2025-06-02 01:02 a.m.
I mean, that’d be hard to meet as you allege in your Complaint that the State failed to provide any notice whatsoever, outside of a server that the vast majority of the community is not in, with vague or nonexistent descriptions of the location(s) of the live-fire, and without barriers demarcating the area.
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:02 a.m.
That was part of it, yes
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:02 a.m.
The overarching theme was that live fire exercises pose an inherent danger
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:02 a.m.
And cannot be done in a public space
meowiittenThe overarching theme was that live fire exercises pose an inherent danger
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:02 a.m.
As the Act offers itself
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:03 a.m.
The Act speaks for itself here
Awesome 2025-06-02 01:03 a.m.
I agree that it poses a danger; I just can’t see how you’d show that no measure could or ever will mitigate that risk, to the degree that you (and other bystanders) would be afforded reasonable protection.(edited)
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:04 a.m.
Well, its like this
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:07 a.m.
This isn't like a real life military drill where they use simulated rounds or fake explosives
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:07 a.m.
They are actively expected to shoot at and kill each other
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:07 a.m.
That is the name of the game
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:08 a.m.
the intent of the legislature is for people to die
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:08 a.m.
to be shot and killed lol
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:09 a.m.
I don't think you can reasonably protect a bystander from being killed
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:09 a.m.
And you know the best part?
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:09 a.m.
If the national guardsmen kill you, they can just claim statutory immunity
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:10 a.m.
Of course, thats for a court to decide
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:14 a.m.@Awesome Can you summon them and then we can hop onto answer + PI briefing schedule?
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:14 a.m.
Singhski and/or Dero
meowiittenAwesome 2025-06-02 01:27 a.m.
Sure.
Awesome used /summon
clerkFlow Bot2025-06-02 01:27 a.m.:white_check_mark: Successfully summoned @dero (edited)
Awesome used /summon
clerkFlow Bot2025-06-02 01:28 a.m.:white_check_mark: Successfully summoned @singhski (edited)
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:30 a.m.
I’ll just start preparing my brief now then
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:31 a.m.
If they don’t respond to the Complaint then that brief can be converted into an MSJ or MJP
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:31 a.m.
Or just default… whatever
meowiittenI don't think you can reasonably protect a bystander from being killed
Awesome 2025-06-02 01:42 a.m.
The tl;dr is that you’ve claimed they took zero steps, but are asking for a declaration that even if they did take steps, you (and others) would still be irreparably harmed. The problem is, there’s nothing in the factual record to support that assertion (and it thus needs to be further briefed).
Awesome 2025-06-02 01:42 a.m.
^ that’s why the TRO is limited to requiring them to take steps
AwesomeThe tl;dr is that you’ve claimed they took zero steps, but are asking for a declaration that even if they did take steps, you (and others) would still be irreparably harmed. The pr...
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:45 a.m.
I see that. But what I’m saying is that the employment of the statute’s commands are inherently dangerous. Like… on a facial reading, it’s shocking. Anyways, yeah, a brief will come soon
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:45 a.m.
Probably tomorrow evening after work
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:45 a.m.
Or afternoon
AwesomeThe tl;dr is that you’ve claimed they took zero steps, but are asking for a declaration that even if they did take steps, you (and others) would still be irreparably harmed. The pr...
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:47 a.m.
Also, in terms of an injunction, I don’t need an actual physical injury to get that relief
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:47 a.m.
There only needs to be a bona fide threat thereof
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:47 a.m.
Hence the Lyon case
Awesome 2025-06-02 01:47 a.m.
You need to show a likelihood of irreparable harm.
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:47 a.m.
Lyons?
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:47 a.m.
Right
Awesome used /add
clerkFlow Bot2025-06-02 01:47 a.m. @Awesome has added @dero to the case channel.
Case Modified
Awesome used /add
clerkFlow Bot2025-06-02 01:48 a.m. @Awesome has added @singhski to the case channel.
Case Modified
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:48 a.m.
I will rely heavily on the statute and I will also be importing an affidavit from an anonymous national guardsman
dero 2025-06-02 01:48 a.m.
May I ask why the guardsman must remain anonymous
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:48 a.m.
So you don’t fire him
dero 2025-06-02 01:48 a.m.
I think that unnecessarily impedes our ability to cross-examine
dero 2025-06-02 01:49 a.m.
or more so diminish the credibility of the affidavit if necessary
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:49 a.m.
I’m willing to disclose his identity only to the judge. I promised him I would keep his identity confidential
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:49 a.m.
He is protected under whistleblower laws
dero 2025-06-02 01:49 a.m.
Right but not from identity disclosure
dero 2025-06-02 01:49 a.m.
the whistleblower laws provide a guaranteed protection against retaliation because he is revealing his identity
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:50 a.m.
We’ll see. I need to read up on the specifics of our state’s whistleblower protections and common law doctrines. That’s a question for tomorrow, unfortunately!
dero 2025-06-02 01:50 a.m.
if he was not revealing his identity there would be no risk of retaliation
dero 2025-06-02 01:50 a.m.
Alright
AwesomeThe Court is satisfied that, at least at this early stage, the Plaintiff (Movant) has shown a fair probability of success on the merits and that he will suffer irreparable harm in ...(edited)
Awesome 2025-06-02 01:50 a.m.
I’ll direct your attention to this.
dero 2025-06-02 01:51 a.m.@Awesome Is it possible we can have a preliminary hearing on that soon
dero 2025-06-02 01:51 a.m.
just so we can get that squared away
deroAwesome 2025-06-02 01:51 a.m.
We’ll have a hearing on it soonish; I’ll need to work out a time we’re all available.(edited)
dero 2025-06-02 01:51 a.m.
the Guard heavily relies on this type of training as part of their curriculum
dero 2025-06-02 01:51 a.m.
Alright, thank youy
dero 2025-06-02 01:51 a.m.
you*
AwesomeWe’ll have a hearing on it soonish; I’ll need to work out a time we’re all available.(edited)
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:51 a.m.
Would you prefer a hearing to a brief
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:52 a.m.
Or both/no preference
Awesome 2025-06-02 01:52 a.m.
If I have any lingering doubts, I’d definitely rather a hearing, so I can question the parties on their respective positions.
dero 2025-06-02 01:53 a.m.
Just to clarify, we are briefing and then possibly having a hearing
dero 2025-06-02 01:53 a.m.
Just so I know what to prepare
deroJust to clarify, we are briefing and then possibly having a hearing
Awesome 2025-06-02 01:54 a.m.
That’d probably be easiest.
dero 2025-06-02 01:55 a.m.
Okay that works for us
Awesome 2025-06-02 01:56 a.m.
Since you’re here, please transmit this Order (https://discord.com/channels/1274202187911790632/1378920878842187878/1378957567098749008) to the CCSO and MNG.
derothe Guard heavily relies on this type of training as part of their curriculum
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:57 a.m.
I’d like to restate to you for clarity our position in this as-applied challenge to the Act is that is poses a substantial threat of harm when employed in public (e.g., county-wide). We do not pose a contest to it being used on military property, although the “shoot, injure, and kill” clauses are certainly too, shocking to the conscious—but that is not the direct subject of our challenge
AwesomeSince you’re here, please transmit this Order (https://discord.com/channels/1274202187911790632/1378920878842187878/1378957567098749008) to the CCSO and MNG.
Awesome 2025-06-02 01:57 a.m.@dero
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:57 a.m.
I have a feeling we’d succeed if we challenged the law facially as well but…
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:58 a.m.
Not what we are doing
meowiitten 2025-06-02 01:59 a.m.
Although I do think “shoot, injure, and kill” would certainly be unconstitutional all the time regardless of where it is employed(edited)
AwesomeThe Court is satisfied that, at least at this early stage, the Plaintiff (Movant) has shown a fair probability of success on the merits and that he will suffer irreparable harm in ...(edited)
Awesome 2025-06-02 06:26 p.m.@dero Please certify that you have provided this Order to the CCSO and MNG.
meowiitten 2025-06-02 07:24 p.m.Plaintiff's Motion for Expedited Summary Judgment, Memorandum in Support, Proposed Order, Exhibit
meowiitten 2025-06-02 07:25 p.m.@Awesome @singhski @dero
meowiitten 2025-06-02 07:40 p.m.@Awesome 
meowiitten 2025-06-02 07:40 p.m.
I have reason to believe the TRO is being violated, but I will go in game and investigate myself
Awesomedero 2025-06-02 07:48 p.m.
I certify that I have provided the order to CCSO and MNG's department heads ISpilledMyTacos and OmniGalaxy.
meowiittenI have reason to believe the TRO is being violated, but I will go in game and investigate myself
Awesome 2025-06-02 07:55 p.m.
Keep me informed of any updates.
AwesomeKeep me informed of any updates.
meowiitten 2025-06-02 08:03 p.m.
2
Looks like I got there too late. I saw a few military vehicles leaving the Bohan Yards area (no barriers or markings anywhere) but nothing substantial
2
Kezzera 2025-06-02 08:19 p.m.@Awesome dawg tell me you can fix perms n shit
Kezzera 2025-06-02 08:19 p.m.
(CHECK THE CHANNEL)
KezzeraAwesome 2025-06-02 08:20 p.m.
I can fix them now.
Kezzera 2025-06-02 08:23 p.m.
yay :D
meowiittenmeowiitten 2025-06-02 09:12 p.m.@Awesome How long do they have to respond?
meowiittenAwesome 2025-06-02 09:14 p.m.
Let’s say Wednesday, June 4, 2025 at 10:00 p.m. , 3 months ago , unless an extension is requested (and subsequently granted).
cc:@dero @singhski
meowiittenLooks like I got there too late. I saw a few military vehicles leaving the Bohan Yards area (no barriers or markings anywhere) but nothing substantial
Awesome 2025-06-02 09:52 p.m.
So not around Mersea/Lander, then?
Awesome 2025-06-02 09:52 p.m.
(or any other densely populated area)
AwesomeSo not around Mersea/Lander, then?
meowiitten 2025-06-02 09:53 p.m.
Bohan Yards adjacent to Lander
meowiitten 2025-06-02 09:53 p.m.
Like near the port
meowiitten 2025-06-02 09:53 p.m.
In that area where the shops under the overpass
meowiitten 2025-06-02 09:53 p.m.
With the shops
meowiitten 2025-06-02 09:53 p.m.
I think that’s just Bogan
meowiitten 2025-06-02 09:53 p.m.
Bohan*
meowiitten 2025-06-02 09:53 p.m.
I don’t recall frankly
meowiittenI don’t recall frankly
Awesome 2025-06-02 09:54 p.m.
Ah, I’m not that familiar with the layout of Lander.
Awesome 2025-06-02 09:54 p.m.
Alright, noted. If there’s evidence of a purported violation of the Court’s TRO, it’ll be dealt with appropriately.(edited)
meowiitten 2025-06-03 12:01 a.m.@Awesome 
meowiitten 2025-06-03 12:01 a.m.
Seems like they are really pushing it
meowiitten 2025-06-03 12:01 a.m.
This is #2
meowiitten 2025-06-03 12:02 a.m.
I'm going to go in game and see if I can catch it
meowiitten 2025-06-03 12:05 a.m.
I honestly feel like with this one it'd be impossible to comply with the TRO
meowiitten 2025-06-03 12:05 a.m.
Assuming thats the entirety of Mersea
meowiittenI'm going to go in game and see if I can catch it
Awesome 2025-06-03 12:08 a.m.
Hm, keep me informed.
AwesomeHm, keep me informed.
meowiitten 2025-06-03 12:10 a.m. 
meowiitten 2025-06-03 12:10 a.m. 